Prather v. Pantone
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- Cohen v. Aldrich (Ga. Ct. App. 1908)
- Howell v. Atkinson (Ga. Ct. App. 1907)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Under the ruling made in the cases of Oliver v. Hardware Co., 98 Ga. 249, and Moultrie v. Crocker, 125 Ga. 82, the defendant, whose employment was that of building cabs and pilots for railway locomotives, was a “laborer” within the meaning of the Civil Code, §4732, exempting the wages of journeymen mechanics and day-laborers from process of garnishment. The fact that the laborer is paid according to the amount, and not the length of time of his work, does not preclude him from claiming the exemption. See Johnson v. Hicks, 120 Ga. 1002.
Jud,gment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.